Profile of Kasarov

I think the PaK38 would be a great solution, except that the 17 pounder is much bigger than the PaK38, so substituting the model just wouldn’t look right.

It was ironic

Your first hint was "70 range AT gun would be balanced"

Also, unfortunately, Relic (so far) has shown no interest in even recoloring models (and I doubt that will change in the near future), so all "reuse this model and reskin it" requests will at most ever be "reuse this model as it is"

I'm guessing that you're from the Eastern part of Germany. I'm well aware of the brainwashing of the communists in that part of Germany, most of you even, to my big surprise, seem to speak or at least understand Russian.

If you don't believe me that's fine, but if you do even a little bit of research you will see that I'm not talking about this stuff without proof. I'm not going to waste my time trying to prove something to someone that doesn't want to hear anything else on the internet.

...I mean, TBF, if you assume people who disagree with you are all communists, I think it's you that doesn't want to hear anything else on the internet...

And I mean, if the Soviets were really so oppressive and evil with their governing, why would anybody who lived in East Germany defend them? Do you really think Soviet "brainwashing" worked in countries like Poland or Hungary who fought to overthrow the Soviets? And, according to western brainwashing sources, didn't East Germany have the worst of it too? I fail to see your logic.

On topic:

There is a lot of context missing there, it is true that a Bren was NOT going to supress a group of infantry at range anywhere near as well as a propper HMG.

Any true HMG does two things, puts down a LOT of rounds, and does so with a "beating patern", which causes suppression over a decently large area. With more accurate weapons like a Bren, you could suppress a small area sure, but maybe not a larger area covering 10-20 infantry or more.

This was pretty much same problem with the more recently used British LSW (Light support weapon - just a long barreled SA80), it was deployed at section level with the role of fire support for flanking manouvers, however again just being a longer barreled version of the standard assault rifle, it only really added extra accuracy, no increase in rate of fire or spread of bullets. So it worked closer to a sniper type weapon, giving more concentrated fire than an actual MG, which was supposed to be its intended role.


I dont know what Dane was saying about Bren accuracy, but I dont doubt that it wouldnt perform suppression dutys as well as a propper MG due to being too accurate. That doesnt mean it wasnt a good gun, or well liked.

I think this is the wrong context to use it in.

The Bren was not and was never supposed to be an HMG, and the modern problem of the LSW not being able to apply enough suppression isn't necessarily relevant to WWII. The Bren fit the UK's infantry doctrine at the time (and for a long time afterwards), which is why it remained in service for decades. The LSW doesn't have nearly the same service life, which I think makes it fair to say it didn't fit very well with the UK's current infantry doctrine.

The Bren is obviously not as effective as a dedicated HMG or emplaced GPMG/MMG when suppressing large groups. However, it's a light machine gun that achieves fire superiority on a far more local level. You don't need to cover a whole open field; you just need to suppress that bloke and his friends over there behind the sandbags. Oftentimes the Bren's accuracy helps in suppressing small groups, especially those behind cover since they know you are accurate enough to perforate their heads if they peeked out to fire back.

Dane's comment that the Bren was too accurate to suppress effectively is almost akin to calling an MG42's suppression fire ineffective because rocket artillery does it better; he's comparing a weapon out of its intended role and scale (or context).

I still love Dane's entertainment value, but I would agree that people should take his history talks with a grain of salt.

It's not just Maxim's which are affected(/infected) by this damage critical. There is a ToW scenario with a couple of Zis-3's which show the "Engine Damage" critical. The effect is a permanent reduction of movement speed, which is why they used that icon. I always assumed it was meant to represent a broken or jammed wheel, which would make moving it quite difficult. It cannot be repaired because, it is meant to be something which cannot be fixed in the field, requiring a full overhaul in a proper workshop.

Well, that seems to be silly because it's a game where broken guns and burnt-out engines can be fixed on the field, and trenches, bunkers, and factories built within a minute. To un-jam or replace a wheel seems so trivial in comparison.

However the Ostwind and mines work is what I'm thinking.

It is a damage cap, not a kill cap as you are suggesting. There isn't an easy, straightforward way to do kill caps.

I agree with all of the changes except moving them to the HQ. I think they should stay in the German T2 building, especially in light of the build time reduction and smoothed out vet.